The 2016 Presidential Election Trainwreck

[Maximus]

Faith? Do you have faith in Hilary's list? Oh, wait, it doesn't exist. Trump just said he wasn't limited to that list. That doesn't offend me (although most of what he says does offend me). but it is far from a mater of faith. It's a data point. I do think it is more likely that I would like Trump's nominees more than Hilary's nominees and the list affects the probabilities.

No candidate has ever given out a list. Trump did because he knows it doesnt matter and he wanted to throw people a bone.

[Moliere]

I once voted for McCain because I thought he was the lesser of two evils. I also voted for Rubio because I thought he needed the vote to keep delegates from Trump. I'm done voting for someone other than a candidate that I support. I'm likely voting Libertarian because that candidate is somewhat close to my political views and because he isn't as corrupt as Hillary. I don't care about whether or not my nonvote for Trump is a vote for Hillary or a vote for a liberal Supreme Court. I'm voting for the guy that best represents me whether he or she has any chance at all at being elected.

Also, Hillary won't do jack to the 2nd amendment. If anything, her election alone will increase gun sales to record highs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Color Me Badd Fan]

Did anyone read the SoS Inspector General's report that came out yesterday? It's pretty clear that Hillary wasn't some doddering old woman clueless about this email thing. She was told on numerous occasions to get her government email system in house and that emails that happened to deal with government business were supposed to be part of the record. She flat out refused to abide by any of it.

The conclusion is she either didn't want the hassle or she didn't want any transparency. This is Hillary Clinton -- of course it was the latter. The gameplan if this came up was to dodge, obstruct and buy herself some time. During that time, you engage in the old Clinton media battle in which you infer that some combination of there being no illegal conduct, not that big of a deal, and/or everyone else does it. If anyone read that Ben Rhodes interview, you'll know that high level Democrats view most of the media as useful idiots that parrot their PR releases. Then, if an investigation does happen or continues then you can tell everyone it's "old news" (aka the "what difference does it make now" defense).

If that lack of transparency was more out of a want to conceal financial dealings rather than it simply being a politician trying to conceal her idiocy, then I can't imagine the Obama Administration sitting on it. Something like that would definitely leak and it would leave a mark on Obama's presidency. Additionally, it seems obvious from the polls that Bernie Sanders runs far better against Trump than Hillary does. Without the email/corruption angle, I'm not really sure why Bernie would otherwise still be running at this point. Sanders might think there is a chance that Hillary is prosecuted or something big is leaked about the story.

[creekster]

No candidate has ever given out a list. Trump did because he knows it doesnt matter and he wanted to throw people a bone.

And?

[creekster]

The conclusion is she either didn't want the hassle or she didn't want any transparency. This is Hillary Clinton -- of course it was the latter. The gameplan if this came up was to dodge, obstruct and buy herself some time. During that time, you engage in the old Clinton media battle in which you infer that some combination of there being no illegal conduct, not that big of a deal, and/or everyone else does it. If anyone read that Ben Rhodes interview, you'll know that high level Democrats view most of the media as useful idiots that parrot their PR releases. Then, if an investigation does happen or continues then you can tell everyone it's "old news" (aka the "what difference does it make now" defense)..

It seems like most of the media in the bay area is parroting the idea that she only did what other SOSs had done, so it wasnt that big of a deal.

[Applejack]

And?

His point is that a non-binding list of some (but not all) possible candidates is the same as no list at all. Voting for Trump based on "the list" is as dumb...well, as voting for Trump for any reason.

[falafel]

Did anyone read the SoS Inspector General's report that came out yesterday? It's pretty clear that Hillary wasn't some doddering old woman clueless about this email thing. She was told on numerous occasions to get her government email system in house and that emails that happened to deal with government business were supposed to be part of the record. She flat out refused to abide by any of it.

I read a recap of it. Interestingly enough, Colin Powell also used a personal email server.

[creekster]

His point is that a non-binding list of some (but not all) possible candidates is the same as no list at all. Voting for Trump based on "the list" is as dumb...well, as voting for Trump for any reason.

Binding list? Whoever said it was supposed to be binding? No one dislikes trump more than me but you guys are losing site of reasoned thinking here. The issue is trying to decide between Trump and Hilary. Trump gives some indication of his likely choices. Hilary does not. Point trump. Does this info 'trump' all of this problems? Of course not! Who said that? Not me. But it does at least undermine the idea that he cannot be trusted at all to pick reasonable nominees. He is certainly as or more likely to do that than Hilary, at this point.


(please excuse the fractued syntax; too lazy to fix)

[creekster]

Did anyone read the SoS Inspector General's report that came out yesterday? It's pretty clear that Hillary wasn't some doddering old woman clueless about this email thing. She was told on numerous occasions to get her government email system in house and that emails that happened to deal with government business were supposed to be part of the record. She flat out refused to abide by any of it.

This is sort or interesting:
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...05-26-14-58-26

This is the sort of thing a prosecutor might do to scare her into making a deal. If she knows they found crap she thought she had deleted, then she might be worried about what else the FBI already has. Fascinating.

[Moliere]

I read a recap of it. Interestingly enough, Colin Powell also used a personal email server.

Are you sure he did?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[frank ryan]

Are you sure he did?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not a server, but he used a personal e-mail. I'm not sure that is any more secure. http://www.politico.com/story/2015/0...f-state-115707

[Topper]

The second amendment didn't go anywhere with Obama and it isn't going anywhere with Hillary, so relax.

Look at the age of the justices. If she has a chance to nominate several key appointees, the Second Amendment will for all practical purposes be gone.

And to the one who responded about Trump's previous statements, I agree that they are disconcerting. However, he will need to work with the GOP and the GOP is pro Second Amendment. It is folly to believe we can trust Hillary on anything. She is wrong on all major issues. There is not a single substantive issue on which she is correct in instances where she differs from others. I would sooner become a Ute than vote for Hillary. She is Trumpf's ugly sister. They are twins, but at least there is a chance the GOP can control him to some degree. There is no chance of controlling the mischief of Hillary. I will probably vote Gary Johnson for integrity's sake, but her opportunity to nominate justices scares the hell out of me. The thought of more Justice Ginsebergs makes want to vomit.

[Northwestcoug]

Binding list? Whoever said it was supposed to be binding? No one dislikes trump more than me but you guys are losing site of reasoned thinking here. The issue is trying to decide between Trump and Hilary. Trump gives some indication of his likely choices. Hilary does not. Point trump. Does this info 'trump' all of this problems? Of course not! Who said that? Not me. But it does at least undermine the idea that he cannot be trusted at all to pick reasonable nominees. He is certainly as or more likely to do that than Hilary, at this point.


(please excuse the fractued syntax; too lazy to fix)

A highly debatable point. Look at his policy statements, and the inevitable retraction or 'walk-back' to nearly all of them, to gauge how committed he is to public proclamations. I see no reason to believe he will take that list any more seriously than his other statements.

[Color Me Badd Fan]

Are you sure he did?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There was no requirement that Department of State emails be only through the government server. It was 2001 when Powell first became SoS. The rule wasn't put in place until 2005. Powell was interviewed on the topic and he said nothing classified went through his personal emails. The laws relating to the transmission of classified information were in place obviously when Powell was at State, so he was careful not to mix classified information in the emails he sent. The IG also looked into Powell's email usage and there wasn't anything indicating that Powell was lying.

Rice, the first SoS, apparently followed the new rule set up in 2005. John Kerry has also followed it.

[Color Me Badd Fan]

This is sort or interesting:
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...05-26-14-58-26

This is the sort of thing a prosecutor might do to scare her into making a deal. If she knows they found crap she thought she had deleted, then she might be worried about what else the FBI already has. Fascinating.

This little line made me laugh:

On Thursday, Clinton said she had been forthcoming with her personal emails.

I guess I could believe this had Hillary never told a self-serving lie in her life. Why should anyone believe anything she says?

From what I can tell, the hacker Guccifer is the guy who released the Sid Blumenthal emails in which there was some back and forth correspondence between him and Hillary. On top of that, it contained some top secret intel. Hillary never released those emails, and apparently she never released emails that showed her being warned against using the private server. Who knows what else is missing aside from dozens of East European hackers and the Russians and Chinese (perhaps the FBI knows quite a bit, actually).